Guest Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by a guest. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
"evolution and the Bible are completely incompatible, which is a claim that literally no Christian who has posted in either this thread or the last one holds to be true." that is because evolution is a fact, and the bible is what they hold to be true*, would it be better if what you hold to be true to be comp[atible with facts, or incompatible with facts?*It's one of the things they hold to be true. And you still have to explain how the bible and the theory of evolution are incompatible.
"You have then tried to force people into defending the straw man you've set up by insisting that they prove any position other than the one you've set up is feasible." i am simply asking you to disprove my theory, that should not be a problem if what you say is true.Theory? I guess you are not talking in a scientific sense =P
"leading experts in evolution and major religious leaders see no conflict". i havent actually seen you give any links (but i might just be blind or somethingStephen Jay Gould (http://www.stephenjaygould.org/library/gould_noma.html), Francis Collins (http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1211593-1,00.html) and the Pope John Paul II (http://www.newadvent.org/library/docs_jp02tc.htm) for example (but I'm sure ratcharmer may give you a better answer with more links and stuff).) so i would love for you to give me the link of the article stating that.
Atheism is to claim that there is no god...
Atheism is the disbelief in the existence of deity. (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/atheism)This disbelief may vary in degrees of certainty (http://www.religioustolerance.org/atheist4.htm), from gnosticism to agnosticism.
But there is no consensus on how to classify the other possible belief systems about deity/deities listed above. Some have suggested the use of modifiers, like:Again, you would only be refering to the strong atheists.
"Strong Atheist," or "Positive Atheist," or "Hard Atheist" to refer to a person who asserts that no deity exists.
"Weak Atheist," "Negative Atheist," "Soft Atheist," "Skeptical Atheist" to refer to a person who simply has no belief in a deity because there are no rational grounds that support his/her/their existence.
Peter Berger suggested that the term "methodological atheism" be used to describe theologians and historians who study religion as a human creation without declaring whether individual religious beliefs are actually true.
The terms "Noncoherent Atheist" or "Noncoherentism" have been suggested to cover the belief that one cannot have any meaningful discussions about deities, because there exist no coherent definitions of "god."
"Apathetic Atheism," or "Apatheism" have been suggested to cover the individual who doesn't really care whether Gods or Goddesses exist. They probably live with the assumption that no deity exists.
No you cannot. They are not* mutually exclusive--take the implications of each one.Believing is not the same thing as knowing, even though the definition of knowledge is mmm... blurry (?) .-.
a)If you believe there is no god, then you accept (know) there is no god.
b)If you accept (know) "god is unknown or unknowable" then you believe that you never will be able comprehend god or know he does or does not exist.
The wikipedia "atheistic agnosticism" or "agnostic theism" is a bullshit way of putting... A person who believes there is no god but does not know it or a person who knows there is a god but does not believe it. If you say there is a god, then you believe there is a god. It is illogical know something and not believe it or to not know and believe something.
Walk up to someone and say "I believe there is a god" then say "I don't know if he exists". They would LAUGH at you...
c)Argument Restated/Rephrased:
The agnostic pleads ignorance. "God is unknown or unknowable"
The atheist says "There is no god"
Either you know there is no god or plead ignorance... cannot be both. You know there is no god and "god is unknown or knowable"? Not logical.
Atheist take: Atheist says there is no god then god is NOT "unknown/unknowable" for God is known--he does not exist. Thereby dispelling the agnostic belief.
Agnostic take: Agnostic says "god is unknown/unknowable" then he knows not if God does or does not exist. To state god does not exist would be to say God is known. Thereby dispelling their agnostic belief.
I am not trying to define your beliefs but you should have some knowledge as to what words mean. But you cannot be both Agnostic and Atheist.Yes, you can be both. Someone might claim that he does not believe there are gods and at the same time, say that he doesn't know if there are gods. Both statements are not mutually exclusive since agnosticism is about what you know and theism/atheism is about what you believe.
Here is a good example of what I mean when you cannot have both answers.
Is the Universe infinite or finite?1) If the universe is infinite, this is beyond our comprehension.There is no middle ground. It either is or is not infinite and cannot be both.
2) If the universe has an end, what does it look like? Is there something outside it? Then again, it's infinite and beyond our comprehension.
To be an Atheist literally means: You do not believe in god.
To be an Agnostic means: You do not know if there is a god or it is impossible to tell.
There is no middle ground. Either there is no god or it is impossible to tell.
a) An agnostic is typically someone who believes we can never definitively prove or disprove a higher power, so it is a moot point. b) You can't really be an agnostic and atheist at the same time. You're one or the other, and in your case you just have a "live and let live" attitude about it.a) Agreed.
